Published
September 10, 2026
Consumers who paid surcharges at stand-alone, nonbank ATMs since 2007 moved a step closer to a claim window when the court entered an order on the $167.5 million Visa and Mastercard settlement on August 14, 2026. There is still nothing to file — the claim form has not launched, and the dates the order sets have not been made public.
What Is This About?
The long-stalled $167.5 million settlement between consumers and Visa and Mastercard over surcharges paid at independent, nonbank ATMs has finally moved on the docket. In Burke v. Visa Inc., No. 1:11-cv-01882 (RJL), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the court entered Docket No. 198 on August 14, 2026 at 10:03 a.m. EDT — recorded as an order on the motion for settlement that also set and reset hearing dates.The motion that order addresses is the one Class Co-Lead Counsel filed on December 18, 2025, asking Judge Richard J. Leon to grant preliminary approval of the settlement and to direct notice to the class. It had sat on the docket for roughly eight months.
One important caveat: the order document has not been publicly posted. The docket shows that the court ruled on the settlement motion and reset hearings, but not the text of what it ordered. That means the three dates readers most want — when the claim form opens, when claims are due, and when the Fairness Hearing will be held — are set, but are not yet public. This page will carry each of them once the order or the official class notice confirms them.
Status
Order Entered August 14, 2026
Docket No. 198 · order on the motion for settlement, hearings set · order text not yet public
Settlement Fund
$167,500,000
Visa $88,775,000 · Mastercard $78,725,000
Can I Claim?
Not Yet
no claim form as of September 10, 2026 · expected ~28 days after preliminary approval
Who Would Be Covered
The class covers people who were charged an unreimbursed access fee for a domestic cash withdrawal at an Independent ATM in the United States on or after October 24, 2007. The court filings call these IATMs; in everyday terms they are the stand-alone machines in convenience stores, gas stations, bars, hotels and small retailers — not the ATMs in a bank branch or lobby.There are also statewide subclasses for consumers in California, Illinois, Massachusetts and Michigan, and a person can belong to more than one class. Credit card transactions, cash advances, prepaid card transactions and withdrawals made with cards issued outside the United States are excluded, as are Visa and Mastercard themselves, government entities, court staff and anyone who validly opts out.
The underlying claim is an antitrust one: plaintiffs allege that Visa and Mastercard network rules barred independent ATM operators from charging lower access fees for transactions routed over cheaper competing networks, which allegedly kept consumer surcharges higher than they would otherwise have been. Visa and Mastercard have not admitted wrongdoing, and a settlement is not a finding of liability.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What Happens Next
The schedule proposed in the December 18, 2025 filing runs on two intervals measured from preliminary approval:• The official settlement website and the claim form go live about 28 days after preliminary approval, at which point A.B. Data, Ltd. begins mailed and emailed notice to the class.
• Claims are then accepted for approximately 180 days.
• If the court grants final approval and no appeals follow, the administrator anticipates sending payments within about six months of final approval.
If the court adopted that proposed timetable on August 14, a 28-day notice period would put the claim-form launch around mid-September 2026. That is arithmetic on the proposal, not a date the court has published — the order could set its own schedule. The place to watch is the official settlement website, NonbankATMSurchargeSettlement.com, which is where the claim form will appear.
Payment is pro rata rather than a flat amount: each valid claim gets a proportional share of what is left of the fund after court-awarded fees, costs, taxes, up to $3 million in notice and administration costs, and service awards, based on the number of qualifying surcharged transactions submitted. Counsel has said it will request fees of up to 30% of the fund. No per-person estimate is possible before the claim count is known.
Will Proof Be Required?
Probably not, though the claim form is the only binding answer. The long-form notice filed in December 2025 does not mention proof, receipts, bank statements or documentation anywhere, and it describes payment as a pro rata share based on the number of qualifying surcharged transactions a claimant submits.The precedent points the same way. The $197.5M Mackmin v. Visa bank-ATM settlement — same court, same judge, same defendants, same administrator — and the 2022 $66.74M bank ATM settlement both let claimants self-report a transaction count under penalty of perjury, with fraud scoring on the back end instead of documents at submission. Nobody keeps ATM receipts from 2008, which is the practical reason these cases have always worked that way.
Watch Out for "Pre-Filing" Offers
A gap between a court order and a live claim form is exactly when scam offers appear. There is no way to pre-register, reserve or lock in a claim in this settlement, and nobody needs to be paid to file one for you — the official claim form is free and goes directly to the administrator.Treat as a red flag anything that asks for payment, bank credentials or a Social Security number to "secure" a nonbank ATM claim, any message guaranteeing a specific dollar payout from a pro rata fund, and any lookalike domain. Notice in this case is mailed and emailed to class members by the administrator; it is not something anyone has to buy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What exactly did the court do on August 14, 2026?
The docket records Docket No. 198, entered at 10:03 a.m. EDT, as an order on the motion for settlement that also set and reset hearings. The order text itself has not been publicly posted, so the dates it fixes are not confirmed here.Is there a claim form yet?
No. As of September 10, 2026 there was no claim form. It is expected on NonbankATMSurchargeSettlement.com roughly 28 days after preliminary approval, per the schedule proposed in the December 2025 filing.What is the claim deadline?
No deadline has been published. The filing proposed a window of about 180 days from preliminary approval; the binding date will come from the court's order and the official class notice.Is this the same as the ATM settlement that already paid out?
No. The $197.5 million Mackmin v. Visa settlement covered surcharges at bank-owned ATMs and its claim window closed January 22, 2025. This one covers independent, nonbank ATMs. A person surcharged at both kinds of machine could be in both classes.How much will each person get?
Unknown. Payment is pro rata from the net fund based on qualifying transactions submitted, so the per-claim figure depends on how many valid claims come in.Full Settlement Details
Our tracking page for this case carries the full eligibility rules, the payment math, the case timeline and the docket history: $167.5M Nonbank ATM Fee Class Action Settlement.Sources
• Court docket, Burke v. Visa Inc., No. 1:11-cv-01882 (D.D.C.) — Docket No. 198, entered August 14, 2026: Burke v. Visa Inc. docket• Motion for preliminary approval and long-form notice (ECF 195, filed December 18, 2025): Burke Visa Mastercard ATM Fees Settlement Motion
• OCA tracking page: $167.5M Nonbank ATM Fee Class Action Settlement
Consumer Notice
This page is for informational purposes only. OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news site and is not a law firm, and it is not the settlement administrator.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Order on the preliminary-approval motion entered August 14, 2026 (Docket No. 198) — claim form not live yet
Case Title
Burke v. Visa Inc.
Case Number
No. 1:11-cv-01882 (RJL)
Court
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Judge
Hon. Richard J. Leon
Date Filed
October 24, 2011
Settlement Fund
$167,500,000 — Visa $88,775,000 · Mastercard $78,725,000
Class Period
October 24, 2007 through the date of preliminary approval
Administrator
A.B. Data, Ltd. (proposed)
